Interventions targeting young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) for increased likelihood of return to school or employment—A systematic review

The present systematic review aims to identify, synthesize, and evaluate evidence of effects from interventions targeting youth not in education, employment, or training (NEET). We searched relevant multidisciplinary databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized re-engagement trials. Primary outcomes were participation in education and employment, and training status. Secondary outcomes included changes in financial status, quality of life and well-being, social functioning, and physical, psychological, and behavioral outcomes. The Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA guidelines were applied. Eligible studies were screened, included, and extracted for data. Nine trials were included (eight RCTs and one quasi-experimental study), in which samples ranged from 96 to 7346 participants. Results on primary outcomes showed that five studies found an effect of interventions on employment outcomes, while three studies indicated an effect on education or training. Results on secondary outcomes included effects on mental health, subjective health complaints, drug use, self-esteem, and self-efficacy. Studies with other main outcomes than re-engagement showed an effect of interventions on pass rates for the driving test, independent housing, and increased job-seeking activities. Limitations and future directions are discussed, including the lack of rigorous studies, theoretical underpinnings, and standardized measures for re-engagement outcomes. Systematic review registration: registered in PROSPERO, CRD42023463837.


Data items
10a List and define all outcomes for which data were sought.Specify whether all results that were compatible with each outcome domain in each study were sought (e.g. for all measures, time points, analyses), and if not, the methods used to decide which results to collect.

Methods, outcomes (8)
10b List and define all other variables for which data were sought (e.g.participant and intervention characteristics, funding sources).Describe any assumptions made about any missing or unclear information.

Study risk of bias assessment
11 Specify the methods used to assess risk of bias in the included studies, including details of the tool(s) used, how many reviewers assessed each study and whether they worked independently, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process.

Methods, critical appraisal (7)
Effect measures 12 Specify for each outcome the effect measure(s) (e.g.risk ratio, mean difference) used in the synthesis or presentation of results.

Synthesis methods
13a Describe the processes used to decide which studies were eligible for each synthesis (e.g.tabulating the study intervention characteristics and comparing against the planned groups for each synthesis (item #5)).
Method, data synthesis-no meta-analysis conducted (8) 13b Describe any methods required to prepare the data for presentation or synthesis, such as handling of missing summary statistics, or data conversions.

N/A
13c Describe any methods used to tabulate or visually display results of individual studies and syntheses.

N/A
13d Describe any methods used to synthesize results and provide a rationale for the choice(s).If meta-analysis was performed, describe the model(s), method(s) to identify the presence and extent of statistical heterogeneity, and software package(s) used.

Section and Topic
Item # Checklist item Location where item is reported (pg) 13e Describe any methods used to explore possible causes of heterogeneity among study results (e.g.subgroup analysis, metaregression).

N/A
13f Describe any sensitivity analyses conducted to assess robustness of the synthesized results.

N/A
Reporting bias assessment 14 Describe any methods used to assess risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis (arising from reporting biases).

N/A
Certainty assessment 15 Describe any methods used to assess certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence for an outcome.

Study selection 16a
Describe the results of the search and selection process, from the number of records identified in the search to the number of studies included in the review, ideally using a flow diagram.
Results (10) + Figure 1 16b Cite studies that might appear to meet the inclusion criteria, but which were excluded, and explain why they were excluded.Results (10-11) + Table 3 Risk of bias in studies 18 Present assessments of risk of bias for each included study.
Results, methodological quality (10-11) + Tabel 1 + Table 2 Results of individual studies 19 For all outcomes, present, for each study: (a) summary statistics for each group (where appropriate) and (b) an effect estimate and its precision (e.g.confidence/credible interval), ideally using structured tables or plots.

Results of syntheses 20a
For each synthesis, briefly summarise the characteristics and risk of bias among contributing studies.
Results (10-16) 20b Present results of all statistical syntheses conducted.If meta-analysis was done, present for each the summary estimate and its precision (e.g.confidence/credible interval) and measures of statistical heterogeneity.If comparing groups, describe the direction of the effect.

N/A
20c Present results of all investigations of possible causes of heterogeneity among study results.

N/A
20d Present results of all sensitivity analyses conducted to assess the robustness of the synthesized results.

N/A
Reporting biases 21 Present assessments of risk of bias due to missing results (arising from reporting biases) for each synthesis assessed.

Certainty of evidence
22 Present assessments of certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence for each outcome assessed.

Discussion
23a Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence.(17)(18)(19)(20) 23b Discuss any limitations of the evidence included in the review.

Discussion (20)
23c Discuss any limitations of the review processes used.

Discussion (20)
23d Discuss implications of the results for practice, policy, and future research.